John McCain’s Video Game Platform: Small Blogger Scores Scoop

Congrats to Lori Ingham and her ConChrist blog for scoring Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s reaction to the video game violence issue.

Ingham caught up to McCain during a campaign appearance in New Hampshire yesterday. From her blog:

I did get to ask him two questions from the audience. Once I FINALLY got the microphone, I introduced myself, where I lived, and as a segue way into the questions mentioned that I used to be a reporter but now ran this blog. These are somewhat paraphrased from the actual questions I asked him.

Question #1: With the current controversy over video game and media violence, what is your stance on allowing parents to make the decisions for their children on what they can see and watch? (This question was rolling around in my head primarily because of the recent posts that I had on Jack Thompson)

McCain’s Answer: He felt that parents should be the ones to decide for their kids on a case by case basis (which I was satisfied with). He then did a weird segueway into the evils of child pornography from there, which kind of had me shaking my head.

GP: We’re proud to say that Lori Ingham is also a GamePolitics reader. It’s great to see a blogger going the extra mile for original content.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    oto kirlama says:

    I’m all for freedom of ttnet vitamin speech and allowing rent a car game makers to put whatever they want in games, but there’s one thing about this app that has me scratching my head.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but from araç kiralama the previous article araba kiralama on this I gathered that players can use Google maps in-game to find the other (real-life?) dealers in their area.  If this is the case, has travesti anyone considered what’s stopping someone from using this app to actually move drugs between hands for reals?

    But majority araba kiralama of their outrage araç kiralama stems from what it could DO TO children, not the content itself.  Talk to one of these people and you’ll find they don’t think any books kiralık araba should be banned from children.  Mention American Psycho and they talk about kiralık araç the redeeming value of using imagination to construct a story.  Reading, no matter what the content, is largely viewed as a consequenceless activity for people of any age.  The reason why I mention American Psycho is because of the content itself.  Gaming never has and likely never will have any scenes where someone has sex with a severed head.  Not gonna happen.  Yet despite this, they’ll fight tooth and nail to protect their children from two boys kissing in Bully but whatever they read is harmless… yeah.

    The entire arguement is kiralık oto based upon a social normality inflicted by luddites who can’t figure out the controls for Halo so it’s frightening and terrifying and obviously the cause of youth violence on the rise even though, in reality, it’s in decline (which is actually a HUGE suprise given minibüs kiralama the economies status).  In  a perfect world, we would have parents that actually parent.  The idea of sales restrictions on media on oto kiralama any form to accomidate parental unwillingness to get involved with their child’s life is the real problem to me.  Here I am, 32 years old, and being held up at a self-scan rent a car needing to show ID before I can buy a $10 M rated game all because Soccer Momthra can’t be bothered to look at the crap Billy Genericallystupidson does in his free time.  It’s too hard for her, so I have to suffer?

  2. 0
    rahj_83 says:

    Um…wasn’t McCain for video games having violent content be edited? Like Mortal Kombat? I’m trying to remember, I wasn’t very old back then, but I’m pretty sure his name was mentioned during that whole pre-ESRB era.

    As to the First Amendment, what would one more form of censorship really do to hurt us? The government already edits and controls what we see on television, what content we have access to on the internet, what we read in books and magazines, what we hear onthe radio, what we can say in public, what we can learn in schools, what we can wear, what, when and where we can practice religion, what products we can buy and where we can buy said products, what, when and where we may urinate or have bowel movements, what we can eat, how we can travel, how much money we’re allowed to make, um…I’m forgetting things…um…what kind of pets we’re allowed to have, how much land we’re allowed to own, um…pretty much everything we do in our lives.

    Most of you people are very opinionated and have very strong beliefs, but what you fail to realize is that you are not free, your opinion does not matter and truth be told, no one cares whether you’re happy or not…or even alive or dead. Well, maybe we won’t go that far, if you’re dead, you can’t pay taxes.

    Truth is, it doesn’t matter who you vote for, or for what reason. The person "elected" to office will be the person "they" want in office. Simple as that. Deal with it, or move to Canada.

  3. 0
    ZippyDSM says:

    What frequent belittling? I can recall 3 times he said get out and exercise. *rolls eyes*

    BTW a 3rd party will never happen in the US until the 2 party system breaks so you are turely forced to pick the lesser of the 2 chossen evils becuse thats how broken the US system is.

    As for Social programs we have a choice to let thos below us die and starve or do what we can for the masses, Social programs or not the problem persay but ineptitude and bureaucracy for the sake of bureaucracy, we should over hual the shcool system in the us to go K-C(collage) and focus on things that make our students smarter not pander to lobby’s and unions but sadly humans=fail(bureaucracy).

    I think going after insurance and big parma ensuring generics are available ASAP that issuance stops over charging and under delivering, when it costs more than 200 a month to insure a family of 3 for 2 cars or 600 for healthcare something is wrong there comes a point when capitalism starts to damage more than it gives, regulation is would work if bureaucracy and pettyness is limited ,

    I is fuzzy brained mew

    (in need of a bad overhaul)

  4. 0
    B says:

    @StealthKnight WOW lets not give facts or anything. He is not support that GI Bill, because he has his own. It’s your call on witch one you think it better.

  5. 0
    TJLK says:


    Too much was said in the comments for me to even begin.  First off I seen someone said socialized medicine was a good thing…. no it isn’t.  It would create a lot of inefficiency.  The medical and pharmaceutical industry would abuse the fact they were getting paid by the government and the consumer would suffer.  Social programs are never the answer.  It causes the people to be dependant upon the government and what we should all be seeking is independence.

    On the topic of his stance on video games:

    I’m glad he takes the stance that parents should decide but I do agree that it is strange he brought up child pornography.  My guess is that he didn’t want to seem like he was against protecting children against and perceived “evils” of society so he mentioned his stance against child pornography to be certain that he is perceived as pro-parent/child rights.

    I’m honestly more satisfied with his answer than Obama’s frequent belitting of gamers.  To be honest, I wouldn’t vote for either if my life depended on it.  They are both establishment candidates and that is not what this country needs.  I’m currently researching into Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party.  I’ll send him an e-mail and see if I can get a response from him.


  6. 0
    Arion ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Sound perfectly reasonable of Obama to say the governement must step in if the industry can’t police itself.  That goes for anything else that needs regulation…medicine, food, guns, whatever.

    The people who freak out about video games here in the US are american citizens too..and they are legion. The government should not just pander to one side of the issue and ignore concerns of the other. It’s our politicians job to answer those concerns and act upon them…even if they don’t agree. In the end its about solutions…the right solutions, and the lawmakers that decide them.

    You see whay bugs me about people who complain about regulation is they don’t bother when it’s in their favor.  What if govenrment passed a bunch of laws protecting video game companies from lawyer lawsuits blaming them for violent acts.  Improbable yes..but I’m sure most gamers would not object…and say the gov is doing its job..blah blah.

    Nothing is really wrong with government regulation and bigger government if it’s done right. I mean take credit cards and student loans for instance. No government regulation (or little of) on that…and check out those illogical interest rates, finance charges and hidden charges. Maybe the gov should have stepped in early and stopped the mortgage crisis before it got too big (banks lending money to people who clearly cant afford to pay back the money after rates rise)….It’s not like nobody didnt see that coming. And gas prices…yikes…I suppose we could just leave it to the oil companies to self police that shit…because they have done such a fantastic (sarcasm) so far. And the pharmicutical industry…yeeeeah..nuff said.

  7. 0
    ZippyDSM says:


    Merely saying some of us see him as a fancy lead weight to balance government out since its been right heavy for a while now, not saying he won’t gain weight and go in the other direction back to ze stupid zone but his wordings in his PR blitzing are no different than the rest only  the word play is akin to turning the volume up.


    Not saying Obama is a hack just a good politician sadly…then again that’s better than G“I iz a ass puppet love me for I iz retarded“ Dubaya….. even mcain is a slight upgrade even if he is older meaner and more beholdant to the reaper leaders….

    I is fuzzy brained mew

    (in need of a bad overhaul)

  8. 0
    Cheese says:

    Most of that doesn’t actually appear in the Bible, it’s one of those things that gets attributed to it, but isn’t actually in it.  There’s a chapter in Rev. that can be interpreted that way, but it’s a bit of a stretch.  Regardless, that should make the Bible thumpers super-extra-happy, that means the end times are coming and they all get to be whisked away into the sky.  Good luck with that. 

  9. 0
    Anonymous says:

    What he says in that interview is leave it up to parents.

    He also says some investigation needs to be done as to the effect of Computer Games on children, personally, I think he’s taking too narrow a scope in his position, as research into all media would be wiser.

    I wonder how many people consider that life is ‘no longer worth living’ and that humanity is ‘worthless’ purely because 95% of all news items on TV make you see the worst of humanity.

  10. 0
    ZippyDSM says:


    As much as the dims need to lay of drugs..the reapers well never fix the country they are to busy lubing up for their corporate masters, the US is more of a aristocracy than a democracy the powerful and wealthy run the nation under the guise of public service.



    Not saying the dims are better merely a different orifice they intrude upon, Obama and Ron paul are the lesser of evils(well that is if the reapers chose RP and not raped his backbone out like they did to mcain) but I digress Obama is the lesser of evils simply because he will push the government back to center while the dims lead us to left of center, it’s the only balance this nation has with the broken 2 party system either a candidate is run that is good but unpopular in the party(like RP) you get to chose continuation of the last monarchy or continuation  of the status quo IE dims rape the populace for a few eyars then the reapers assert their dominance on the populace and the poor lil sheeple that have a memory span of a nat go running back and forth to the parent that’s less abusive in the last few years….its a sick sad process.


    Obama has more IQ and skills than duyba so it can’t be so bad under his reign, at least he appears to be a smart conversationalist, sure change is a key word to herd sheeple better but everyone uses it Obama has wit and intendance he could use more swagger but frankly after GW walking around like he had 2 basket ball’s in his pants we can do without moronic swagger for a lil bit…I have a feeling whoever gets elected will only last 1 term anyway.


    \I is fuzzy brained mew

    (in need of a bad overhaul)

  11. 0

    We’d be better off if this was Red vs. Blue. Vote for Sarge!

    -If shit and bricks were candy and tits, we’d all be livin’ large.

  12. 0

    If you want to look at the biblical view, the bible says the anti-christ will be a good talker whom everyone seems to love, and promises to unite, but in the end will destroy (sort of a Stalin-ish character). Sound like Obama?(I’m not endorsing a religious arguement, nor am I trying to ignite some religious crusade against Obama, just digging deeper into that train of thought)

    -If shit and bricks were candy and tits, we’d all be livin’ large.

  13. 0
    KayleL says:

    I have nothing against McCain, but someone brought up something interesting about his name.

    McCain means ‘Son of Cain’, and in the myth Garden of Eden, Eve gave birth to twins, Cain and Abel. Cain was the evil brother and committed the first murder that ever happened in mankind by killing Abel.

  14. 0

    I’d like to point out that games are one of the few things we still make in this country, so that would make them an economical issue too.


    -If shit and bricks were candy and tits, we’d all be livin’ large.

  15. 0
    TheEdge ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    Hmm,I never thought of it like that.

    Well,I’m a Libertarian,so the Constitution is pretty important to me.

    It’s just,it almost seems people on this site are more concerned about games being censored than winning the War in Iraq,or freeing us from foreign energy dependence,or resurrecting the falling dollar.

    Games are important,but I’d rather games be censored than have to tongue polish a statue of Osama bin-Laden on the White House front lawn.

  16. 0
    Corey says:

    Honestly, I feel that no matter which of the two main candidates win the election, there is no way in hell they could do a worse job than Bush. Every time I see that man he comes off a bumbling fool. He always seems nervous too, like people are going to figure out he can’t read or something. Both of the presidential candidates look like shining beacons of hope and intelligence when compared to our current leader.   

  17. 0

    Well, it’s nice that he’s sensible about videogames, but I’m against pretty much everyting else he’s about. If Hillary had won the democratic seat, I would have supported her over McCain, despite the fact that she’s a total bitch. In the end, I can live without games, but with the way the econemy is going, and the price of gas and all the other problems we have, videogames are not that important in comparrison. But again, I must stress, if Jesse Ventura chooses to jump in at the lat minute, I’ll support him.

    -If shit and bricks were candy and tits, we’d all be livin’ large.

    EDIT: Oh, and I aknowledge that a person’s stance on the first amendment is important, and that first amendment rights are perhaps the most important rights of all. Huh…actually…I think I might have supported McCain over Hillary after all… hey, has McCain’s stance on gun controll changed, or is he still claiming to be a conservative whilst trying to dismantle the second amendment?

  18. 0
    ArchRanger says:

    I agree with you for the most part, but where a candidate stands on video game censorship is a good indication of where they stand on other First Amendment rights. McCain not taking a populist stance and advocating government regulation of content is a pretty good indication that he isn’t going to walk all over the first amendment. This is one of the biggest worries I’ve had about him, so this is a really good sign.

    I agree that there are a lot of other important issues, but where a candidate stands on the First Amendment is pretty important in my book. I’m also for smaller government and bureaucracy in general, so it’s a good thing there too.

  19. 0
    TheEdge ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I’m all for games being left alone,but we have WAY bigger things to worry about.

    I’m not trying to flame up the server,and I know I’ll sound like a bad gamer,but I’ve just about stoped caring about what our candidates will do to games.

    It’s definitely one of the farthest thing from my mind when I think about our candidates.


  20. 0
    the1jeffy says:


    Right-wing folks think McCain is a Liberal, Left-wing loonies (like you, I guess) think he’s voting for 4 more years of Bush.  Both positions are just plain ashattery.  Wake up people, it’s not Red vs. Blue.

    ~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

  21. 0
    StealthKnight ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I hate to dissapoint you but he is a republican in disquise.  He failed to support the new GI bill that would give the troops more benifits and finachal support when they get out. He is a fool to not realize that diplomacie can work as it did in the cuban missal crises. He claimed to support legislation that would help katrina victims and suport investigating the fema fiasco but turns around and does the opposite when he could vote on such issues.  He even claims on meet the press that he suports many bush policies. go to Crooks and to see more of his hypocrocies in the news.


    here is video about what you get when you vote republican.

  22. 0
    Daspion says:

    I have to agree, they’re not as bad as Kerry and Bush, but not the greatest. My vote is based on who will do the least damage to our already unstable nation. We’re dangerously teetering on censorship and full government control of our lives, thanks to Bush and Congress (they are to blame as well, they had to vote for the laws for Bush to sign them). That being said, its hard to judge what Obama will do, McCain is more of a libertarian than a Republican, which is why he is an outcast in his party, so good for him.

  23. 0
    Belgarion89 says:

    At least it’s not quite like the last couple elections, which have been the lesser of two evils.  This on’es more like the better of two mediocres.  Be a good reason to get out of the house on a Tuesday though.


    So speak I, some random guy.

  24. 0
    GryphonOsiris says:

    Indeed, at least Hillary is out of it, since she would have ignored at least half of the Amendments when it suited her and probably would have repealed the 22nd Amendment, or have herself declared Queen/Empress, ect.

  25. 0
    BmK ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    It’s good to see that both Obama (who mentioned he was against regulation awhile back) and McCain are against government regulations on Free Speech. Clinton was the only real nanny-statist in the running and she is out now. Thank God!

  26. 0
    the1jeffy says:

    " ….at this point the election still seems like a choice over which amendment you’d rather have ignored."

    That’s the sad goddamn truth.

    ~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

  27. 0
    ArchRanger says:

    I was considering Obama, but this is giving me pause. I’d like to vote Libertarian, but they really don’t have a shadow of a hope, and more and more it seems like McCain is against government intervention into personal lives(A lot of Libertarians fall under the Republican party, maybe the campaigning for Ron Paul had an effect on the party line? A good thing, either way.), which is making him more and more attractive for the role. He still has a lot to prove though, at this point the election still seems like a choice over which amendment you’d rather have ignored.

  28. 0
    L42yB says:

    OK… just go into google and search for "Segueway".  Currently 12,000 odd results found.   Accept that the word is being used by a large number of people.  I never said it was correct, just that it is an evolution of the original word.  Many, many words have found their way permanently into the english language because people spelt them incorrectly.  You seem to be a rather pedantic and condescending type of person.  Best of luck to you with that.

    — mostly harmless

  29. 0
    TimC says:

    I went into Google and typed "define:segueway" and got "No definitions were found". Also, I’ve never seen it spelled that way either. You also say that it’s a phonetic spelling but the word isn’t pronounced "segueway" either.

    This isn’t a case like "catsup/ketchup", where an alternative spelling has gained legitimacy over time. It’s spelled "segue" and spelling it "segueway" just makes you look like someone who needs to crack a book more often. (Note – comment directed at "mostly harmless" and not at Ms. Ingham who can certainly be forgiven the occasional spelling error in a blog post).

  30. 0
    L42yB says:

    Go into google and type "define:segueway"

    Anyway, I wasn’t arguing.  You are correct in saying that the "correct" (although I prefer "original") way of spelling it is just "segue".  Just that the word is evolving and you are being left behind, and that it is pointlessly pedantic to fight the evolution of language.

    "segueway" may not be correct, but that has never stopped this sort of thing from becoming the norm 😉  Common sense always wins out in the end, which means that words tend to end up being spelled phonetically after enough time has passed…

    — mostly harmless

  31. 0
    Gregg K says:

    Nope, only in  your own mind. I’ve never seen it spelled that way until you did. You or others just confused segue (an action) with Segway (a trademarked product)

  32. 0
    L42yB says:

    Far as I know "Sequeway" has become an accepted americanism…  it is certainly used frequently.

    Of course, you are correct in saying that the original spelling is just segue – but english is an evolving language and it doesn’t pay to be pedantic about such things…. otherwise we’d all still be up to our necks in thees and thous 😉

    — mostly harmless

  33. 0
    Anonymous says:

     MonkeyFace, you don’t even know what you’re talking about. Did you even know he adopted the oldest two when he married Carol Shepp, and that the youngest was adopted from Bangladesh?

    Ignorance goes both ways, you know.

  34. 0
    Anonymous says:

    You’re Just bitter that you can’t be pissed about his stance. What hes really saying here is that hes for smaller government. Now ask the bloated government liberals Hillary or Obama.

  35. 0
    Anon says:

    Plus GTA4 is generally referenced by its opponents as pornography being sold to children. I’m not sure if thats what he got it from but it would make some sense (even if it isn’t true).

  36. 0
    Syco ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    to people who don’t understand video games and the culture around it all seems dirty. And whats the dirtiest thing you can think of…………………………………………….  KIDDIE PORN

  37. 0
    Monte says:

     Does the lower "expense" that you talk about also refer to the lives of soldiers? Cause considering Iran has a fairly large military with tanks and what-not (unlike what Iraq had), i would say that the loss of lives in a battle with Iran would get fairly high…

    Could we win against Iran? ya, we beat them out in both quality and quantity of our military… however, the fight would hurt like hell. Ofcourse, this is not even considering the possibility of other countries aiding Iran… Other counties siding with Iran is what could turn an American-Iran war into World War III…

  38. 0

    I’d like to add that Adolph Hitler was high on all sorts of mind altering substances(back when they perscribed shit like cocaine) to help him with various disorders and whatnot, so…we might not have won had it not been for that…not to sound all un-American or nothin’…

    (From the History Channel special "High Hitler")

    -If shit and bricks were candy and tits, we’d all be livin’ large.

  39. 0
    Anonymous says:

     no on both counts. A total war, like the one you are referencing, is waaaay more expensive than a limited war like Iraq, it just comes all at once rather than a slow drain. WWII cost what would today be trillions of dollars. And as to the second, yeah, that won’t happen because of a coupula things called ”international opinion” and ”basic human rights.”

  40. 0
    tony selby says:

    as to point 1, if we actually fought Iran like it was a war and not the bullshit we have done starting in Viatnam it really wouldn’t be that expensive, the problem is the american public and media get all up in arms any time we fight a war in a maner where it can actually be won, because lets face it, you can’t win a war by simply killing soldiers, you have to make your enemy want to stop fighting, we refuse to fight in a way that will make them stop fighting

  41. 0
    Xlorep DarkHelm says:

    Of course, their position on video game regularion happens to be very relevant to this site. If you want their positions on foreign policy, maybe looking elsewhere than "GamePolitics" would be more relevant.

    "I’m not responcabel fer my comuter’s spleling errnors." — Xlorep DarkHelm

  42. 0
    Anonymous says:

     1. doing that would reduce the U.S. to second world country, given the massive expense involed, and would probably start World War three. So, for all practical intents and purposes, we can’t.

    2. it’s not one isssue. The republicans have bowed to the religous right on stem cell research, and to oil companies on global warming. And abstinece education does’nt wrok because no matter what, kids are going to have sex. You can’t stop that with anything short of mass castration.

    3. Bullshit. While there will inivtably be small drops in any free economy, every major recession can be traced back to a clear cause, usually stupidity or laize faire economic policies. Republicans don’t exactly have a stellar ecent record were the economy is concerend. Reagan lead the U.S. into a recession, Bush 1 didn’t get us out, and bush 2 (aside from the current recession), actully started with a budget surplus from the clinton years,a nd now we have what i think is the biggest deficit in recent history.

    4. BULLSHIT. There is a reason that most things say made in china on the bottom. Also we simply don’t the raw materials such as Oil, 9from the middle east), and copper (from Jamaca). That’s one of bigest lies i’ve heard in a while.

    5. The UN has is problems, but to think that America can single handley run the world, as both Bush and McCAin seem to think, is the most dangerous kind of misconception. 

  43. 0
    Evilducks says:

    Only somebody that knows nothing about Vietnam would compare what is happening in Iraq to what happened in Vietnam.  Even early in the war there were more American casualties in one year than there were in all of the Iraq war.

    I bet it looks good on a poster though.

  44. 0
    the conspiracy says:

     Socialized medicine is GOOD thing. We are the only first world industrialized country without it. We spend more on healthcare than any other country, and we have more sick people. Shit, Cuba is a third world country run by a dicatator, and they have better healthcare. If you’re paranoid about ”choice of healthcare being taken away”’, then calm the fuck down. You can still pay for healthcare if you want to, the insurance companies aren’t gonna refuse to take your money. 

    And it’s been proven time and time again that regulation is eedd (um.. Great Depression?). Look at how thigns are going now. Bush has been very lax with regulations and were in a recession. What flounders is a totally state run economy, like that of Soviet russia, not a regulated free market. 

  45. 0

    I gotta say, I agree with you on like, 89% of what you said, especially about the U.N. That whole damn thing is a joke. I believe it could be salvaged though. Ever hopeful.

    -If shit and bricks were candy and tits, we’d all be livin’ large.

  46. 0
    Cheese says:

    "… and that their going to take that money redistribute it to "people in need", like minorities and women and everyone else that the Whitey’s been keeping down."

    [sarcasm]That is a well thought out and reasoned belief.[/sarcasm]


  47. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    He isn’t talking about video games. Obama wants to regulate the economy overall, of which video games are a small part. Imagine what happens when the government decides that Rockstar is making "windfall profits", and that their going to take that money redistribute it to "people in need", like minorities and women and everyone else that the Whitey’s been keeping down.

  48. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    1. You severely underestimate our military. Iran could entirely wiped off the map by tomorrow if we so chose. We won’t, but we could.

    2. So one issue, then. And not just one issue, one issue limited to a fringe of the Republican party. What’s wrong with abstinence-based education, so long as you mention the alternatives? The best way to not get pregnent or get an STD is to not have sex.

    3. You have no idea what either of their policies are, nor how we got where we are. Capitalism is based off of boom and bust cycles. There is no way to stop it without ruining the economy completelely.

    4. No, we don’t. The United States has all the resources needed to be completely self-reliant. We wouldn’t have gotten where we are if we weren’t. Many of the states don’t want businesses using those resources, but they are still there.

    The U.S. is trying to take its case to the U.N. Where has it gotten us? Nowhere. The U.N. is a pathetic attempt at a world government that currently serves as a shield that oppressive regimes hide behind. The U.N. is a worthless mistake, and needs to go away before it causes a third World War. The Iraqi people wouldn’t have been better off either way. Now they have a chance to succeed in the world. U.N. troops wouldn’t have magically stabalized the region. They still would have been painted as Western invaders, and the militias would still have been recruiting the populace with ease. Our current situation has allowed a competent general to take over and stabalize the country.

  49. 0
    cheese says:

    Of video games?  He’s never said or voted for anything of the sort.

    “We’re going to have to parent better, and turn off the television set, and put the video games away, and instil a sense of excellence in our children, and that’s going to take some time.”

    Obama, 46, told a packed Wilkes Hall in Pennsylvania, US to “turn off the television, turn off the video games”, adding that "Government can’t do everything". 

    I don’t see anything about federal regulation on games there at all, quite the opposite.  Seems you need to do some research yourself, buddy.  

  50. 0
    Anonymous says:

    1. Sabre rattling while a signifigant portion of your military is tied up elsewhere is not likely to have any meaningful results with Iran.

    2. Given that The religious right has been leading the charge on creationism and/or intelligent design to be taught in schools and abstinence only education I’m inclined to belive that the democrats are more science friendly then republicans.

    3. Mcain is advocating 4 more years of bushonomics which is leading your nation into a recession. Hell, last fall the canadian dollar was topping the american dollar. The only reason why it won’t totally outstrip the USD, is because our economy is conjoined to yours.

    4. Too bad you actually need to do buisness with those other countries and maintain your presence in order to be able to get anything accomplished. Let’s look at iraq. If the US had been able to make the case to the UN, then you would have had tens of thousands more troops on the ground to help maintain security and rebuild the iraqi’s infrastructure. This would have given the Iraqi people a much better outlook on the situation and extremists wouldn’t be able to dig in the way they have. If nothing else, you wouldn’t have lost an average of 800 americans a year in that meat grinder.

  51. 0
    neoSpider says:

    Well, for those of us in the game industry, whatever regulation that occurs to it effects us. Who cares about the economy when you lose your job because of government regulation on video games?

  52. 0
    Anonymous says:

    Actually, I’m the one who said that Future weapons are Stupid.

    And frankly, the budjet that is allocated to producing them is absurd, particularly when there’s no real timetable for producing a practical application. Seriously, missile defense has been kicked around for decades, and it STILL hasn’t produced better then 40% projected protection against a massed nuclear assault. 60% of a massed nuclear assault from china or russia is enough to convert the united states into black glass.

    I’m not totally against the development of new military technology. Lighter, more durable body armor and automatic weapons that don’t jam are will always be in demand.

  53. 0
    Gaddez ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I’m calling bull on iraq being peaceful by the end of the year. I’m calling bull on it being peaceful at any point in the forseeable future; Al-sadr’s forces are too well entrenched and have too much public support right now, and nothing the US or Al’maliki have done has been able to make a dent in it.

    As to permanent bases, any such effort would act as a lightning rod for Anti american sentiments in the middle east.

  54. 0
    Brokenscope says:

    Actually it is quite possible, though I think we are thinking different things when we say managed.

    When I say managed I mean managing the money supply, combating high inflation, and promoting stable economic growth.

  55. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    1. Others have tried talking to Iran. All have failed, and there is no reason to believe that Obama will be any more effective.

    2. The Democrats don’t give a shit about science. Few, if any, politicians do. To both parties, science is only something to listen to when it supports you.

    3. Obama has proposed more government programs that will cost in the hundreds of billions. I laugh in your face at this charge.

    4. The rest of the world can go fuck itself. U.S. citizens and U.S. politicians need to look after U.S. interests only.

    5. What? So your going to abandon those who want to control you for moral reasons for a different group who wants to control your life? The Democrats punish the successful, praise whiners, and attempt to surpress free speech when it "offends people".

  56. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    Who said I wanted out? Who said that I think those future weapons are stupid? I certainly never did. Never go into a war without the intent to win.

  57. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    Quote sources. Frankly, Iraq might very well be "won" at the end of this year, given the way things are going. I remember him saying that there might be troop bases for around a hundred years, so long as there was no serious violence.

  58. 0
    Shih Tzu says:

    I’m happy to see McCain is reasonably sensible on video game regulation, but thanks, I’ll vote for the candidate and the party who

    1. will promote foreign policy with emphasis on diplomacy, rather than start wars based on uncertain or exaggerated intelligence and ignore or fire anyone who voices concerns (never mind the outright lies over the cost of the whole thing)

    2. will actually pay attention to the scientific community and work to improve environmental standards

    3. will spend within the country’s means (the national debt soared under Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II; the only time we had a balanced budget was during the Clinton years)

    4. will restore the USA’s standing with the world community, and

    5. will completely ignore the theocratic fringe who want to, yes, control your life through the government

    I am going to vote for Obama SO HARD.

  59. 0
    the1jeffy says:

    "By the way, Obama has never said he is for more govt regulation."

    His voting record says otherwise, do some research, pal.

    ~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

  60. 0
    cheese says:

    Um, yes?  Whoever you support, both have policies on each of those points. It’s up to you to decide which way you want them handled and vote accordingly.

    My point being, there are larger issues then violent video games in this election season.  Neither candidate has said they want regulation on game content, so it’s kind of a moot point.

  61. 0
    Brokenscope says:


    Fine, the economy flounders when improperly managed.

    I mean are people seriously surprised by inflation when the government dumps money into the economy. What about a tax structure that almost punishes you for making good investments and saving while giving you every reason to spend your money. Don’t forget a media that encourages spending more money than you have.

    Not to mention that a good many of Obama’s initiatives are on the opposite side of the stupid spectrum from anything bush or McCain has proposed. There is also the wonderful fact almost every bit of military research goes towards reducing the human size of the military. We of course all know that all that military research never gets to the civilian market, and all those folks employed by military research losing their jobs won’t add to unemployment.


    They are both idiots though .

  62. 0
    Anonymous says:

    Mcain Thinks that iraq can be won inside of 5 years. This isn’t somthing I would associate with good forign policy.

    Actually segways well into how much of a tard he is on economy as well; Near as I can tell he’s totally unwilling to raise taxes to help pay for the war and as a result you’re instead getting China to pay it off for you, directly strengthening your biggest economic rival while draining your own.

  63. 0
    Gaddez ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I’m calling BS on the "economy flounders when regulated" line, since GWB has been pretty foot loose and fancy free with it and as a result it is crashing.

    Furthermore, Barack’s planning on getting you out of iraq and cutting funding to the ridiculous future weapon programs (EG microwave tanks, power armored exoskeletons, missile defence shields ect.) This will seriously cut back on how much the goverment is spending and allow for many of his initiatives to take place.

  64. 0
    deuxhero says:

    You are missing the point, if a politician is in favor of these laws, they are clearly willing to ignore the first amendment, THAT is a VERY good reason for concern and it would more then warrent not voteing for them.

  65. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    McCain is tops in foreign policy and healthcare. Obama has no solutions that would improve the situation. In fact, most of what he proposes would cripple our economy and empower our enemies.

  66. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    No, he’s said that he’s for more government programs, would support a program that serves as a stepping stone to socialized medicine, would raise taxes, regulate industry, and likely bring about the oppressive "Human Rights" Tribunals in Canada in the U.S.A. He’s also said that he would SUPPORT $5, support the ethanol currently raising food prices, and bail out the people who took loans they couldn’t pay for. If he got the chance to nominate Supreme Court Justices, we would be seeing more of these bullshit "feelings over Constitution" rulings. The economy flounders when it is regulated, and Obama wants more regulation. He believes that somehow, some way, he’s going to get an oppressive regime that has avowed to destroy America to discuss things with him.

  67. 0
    Cheese says:

    With gas at 4 bucks, oil closing in on 150 a barrel, an international food shortage, food prices rising, two wars, secret prisons, torture, curtailed civil liberties, the housing bubble bursting, the elimination of habeas corpus, illegal wiretapping, the stock market in free fall, up to three supreme court seats opening up (which leads to about a bajillion more issues); with all that, if you are basing your vote this November on the candidates opinion on VIDEO GAMES, then I don’t know what to tell ya, pal.

    By the way, Obama has never said he is for more govt regulation. He has grouped games in with other forms of junk culture, saying that kids should be more involved in real life experiences and education then with slaughtering the Covenant.  Something most folks would agree with: It’s better for kids to go outside and play football for real then sit inside on the couch playing Madden.

  68. 0
    Shadow Darkman Anti-Thesis of Jack Thompson says:

    Hello there, Lori! Good to have you here! It’s good to know we’ve got the press, at least to an extent, on this little case. Here’s to the hope you publish many more good stories!


  69. 0
    MonkeyFace says:

    Alrighty now we know what he thinks about the most important issue ever, now we can ask some lame crap about Iraq/iran, the economy, Health Care you know pointless junk like that.

    And while we’re on the topic of McCain I’d like to post the names and dates of birth of all 7 of his kids

    Douglas (b. 1959), Andrew (b. 1962), Sidney (b. 1966), Meghan  (b. 1984), John (b. 1986), James (b. 1988), Bridget (b. 1991)  by my calculations that put his eldest kid at about 49 and his youngest at 17 wow, thats kind of, yah…

    —-Reno to Thompson "I’m only interested in virile men. That’s why I’m not attracted to you." This kids, is what we call a grammatical smack down

  70. 0
    Rev Melon says:

    It’s about time more people of power/influence began to speak the truth everyone ( sans Jack Thompson ) already knows: Be a better parent!

  71. 0
    GryphonOsiris says:

    I’ll take it a step further, common sense and politicians have nnot gone hand and hand together for at least a century in the United States.

  72. 0
    Scoop11 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I just think it’s because he’s not well versed on the issue. He looked somewhat confused when I started asking him the question and brought up certain video games that have been criticized. Although afterwards I had a few people from the audience say they thought that I asked him good questions (my other one, also in the post, was on the media’s treatment of him in the campaign), and one person said to me, "I bet you no one else has ever asked him a question about video games."

    And I found the headline here amusing, just because of the use of the word "Scoop" — my legitimate nickname from college that I’ve been using as a handle since then.


  73. 0
    Dark Sovereign says:

    If I had to bet I’d say he’s simply not concerned with the issue. And why should this surprise you? He’s considered an outcast in his own party.

  74. 0
    Loudspeaker says:

    It is interesting that he seemed to want to "change the channel" rather quickly after he answered.  Maybe he just didn’t want his fax machine murdered by JT?  Who knows.

    I am rather surprised by his answer.  With his stance on many other issues I didn’t take him as being one who felt regulation of video games was up to the parents.  Interesting.  Maybe he’s simply seen how the courts have ruled that games are protected under the 1st ammendment?  It would be interesting to have him give his reasons behind his answer.

    "Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

  75. 0
    Erasmus Darwin ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    There’s a more obvious blunder, namely that she increased the length of the word by a whopping 60%.  It’s spelled "segue".  The "-ue" provides the "way" sound.  "Segueway" would be pronounced "segwayway".

  76. 0
    Scoop11 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Lori Ingham here. Bad editing on my part…it was late in the afternoon by the time I got home, so I just started typing (if you look at that post compared to other stuff I have on there, it’s longer than the normal post that I will write during the day). I usually catch myself repeating words when I go over it, but I was so excited about getting it up there I forgot to double-check.

    Thanks, GamePolitics! 😀

  77. 0
    L42yB says:

    She seems to like the word "segueway"…  not saying it wasn’t used appropriately (heck, if politicians were RPG characters then "segueway" would probably be one of their major skills), just that she used it twice in quick succession and it seemed a bit weird to me…

    — mostly harmless

  78. 0
    Cheater87 says:

    Obama is fine with how the video game industry is handing itself. Hillary is pro government censorship and regulation of content and distrobution of games to "Save the childrens".

  79. 0
    Meggie ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    It’s refreshing to see such a big-name politician endursing common sense.  Kudos to the blogger who actually got to pose a question on an important video game directly to a presidental hopeful.

  80. 0
    the1jeffy says:

    So you’re glad to see a candidate leaving things to parental control, but will vote for someone who wants to let the government control more aspects of our life?


    ~~All Knowledge is Worth Having~~

  81. 0
    RolicRillics says:

    Is that the way the question was worded when asked to him though?

    I’m sure it wasn’t intentional, but that question’s wording is baited to be answered in that way, regardless of the actual standing of the candidate on the game legislation issue.

  82. 0
    Scoop11 says:

    That is the truncated question. The way the question was worded was more along the lines of explaining the history of why I was asking the question (I even brought up the controversy over "GTA IV"), as well as bringing up the fact that some states are trying to enact legislation to make it a criminal offense to sell M or AO rated games to kids.

    I will say, though, that I still find the transition into child porn odd.

Leave a Reply